| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
15 Nov 2006 11:13:28 PM |
| Object: |
Homos latest ploy to get married |
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
....The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or other
physical alterations. One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "marriage"
activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan. New York City is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter the sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth,
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The transgender
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay marriage,"
he suggests. "What they're doing is they're saying gender is what you want
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God." It is
preposterous, LaBarbera contends, for a person to simply decide what his or
her gender is when "for the vast, vast majority of people, they have biology
to tell them." The Americans for Truth spokesman says he believes this
campaign to redefine gender "is the most radical movement, I think, in the
whole agenda." The New York City Board of Health is expected to vote on the
proposal in December, and it is expected to pass.
--
--
----------
J Yöung
youngopinions@aol.com
.
|
|
| User: "Mitchell Holman" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 06:49:31 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
news:icSdnfA9O-ljbsbYnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@giganews.com:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new
proposal that would allow people to change their gender on paper,
without regard to their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of
any surgical or other physical alterations.
And this affects you how, again?
One pro-family advocate
how predictable.
believes same-sex "marriage" activists have an ulterior motive in
pushing this plan.
Rightwing control freaks are ALWAYS seeing
ulterior motives in people having more fun than
they are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 08:47:38 AM |
|
|
Mitchell Holman wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
news:icSdnfA9O-ljbsbYnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@giganews.com:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new
proposal that would allow people to change their gender on paper,
without regard to their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of
any surgical or other physical alterations.
And this affects you how, again?
He holds an opinion. And this affects you how, again?
One pro-family advocate
how predictable.
Yes, you are
believes same-sex "marriage" activists have an ulterior motive in
pushing this plan.
Rightwing control freaks are ALWAYS seeing
ulterior motives in people having more fun than
they are.
And who decides who is having "more" fun than anyone else? Who are you
to determine that?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 10:52:09 AM |
|
|
osprey wrote:
Mitchell Holman wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
news:icSdnfA9O-ljbsbYnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@giganews.com:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new
proposal that would allow people to change their gender on paper,
without regard to their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of
any surgical or other physical alterations.
And this affects you how, again?
He holds an opinion. And this affects you how, again?
One pro-family advocate
how predictable.
Yes, you are
believes same-sex "marriage" activists have an ulterior motive in
pushing this plan.
Rightwing control freaks are ALWAYS seeing
ulterior motives in people having more fun than
they are.
And who decides who is having "more" fun than anyone else? Who are you
to determine that?
Simple observation.
You've got a married gay couple, good healthy sex life, going out and
enjoying themselves.
Then you've got the rightwing control freaks like a certain christian
fundamentalist who are crying and miserable about their hypocrisy.
Which group do you think is having more fun?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DarkAngel" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 10:03:25 AM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or other
physical alterations.
Unmentionned is the fact that the person must have been diagnosed as
trangendered by a licensed psychologist/psychotherapist. The article
paints some ludicrous worldview in which anyone can just pick and
choose a gender with fickleness and change it again the day after.
One pro-family advocate
You mean, one anti non-heteronormative family advocate.
believes same-sex "marriage" activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan.
One might like to remind the paranoid that transgender activists and
gay activists aren't the same people.
New York City is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter the sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery.
Surgery is not available to everyone. It's costly. And there is no
reason why this should be the litmut test.
Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth,
Because there are many Americans against Truth... *rolls eyes*
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The transgender
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay marriage,"
he suggests.
This is a complete non-sequitur. Transgenders are not (necessarily)
homosexuals, and vice-versa. You're not even speaking of the same
people. A lesbian male-to-female transgendered person can already marry
her female lover right now, because the law claims she's male.
This is all just a bunch of ***** from idiots who have no idea what
they're talking about. Biological sex isn't gender isn't sexual
orientation.
"What they're doing is they're saying gender is what you want
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God."
Transgenderism has a biological basis. The idea that the biological sex
is the only determinant of gender is fucking backward. Genetics shows
this is not necessarily the case. You can be XY and have a vagina. So
there.
---
No Gods. No Masters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tuco Ramirez" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
29 Nov 2006 02:02:46 AM |
|
|
DarkAngel wrote:
J Young wrote:
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or other
physical alterations.
Unmentionned is the fact that the person must have been diagnosed as
trangendered by a licensed psychologist/psychotherapist.
The opinion of a witch doctor or a rain-maker is worth as much of
either of the "authorithies" you mention.
The article
paints some ludicrous worldview in which anyone can just pick and
choose a gender with fickleness and change it again the day after.
One pro-family advocate
You mean, one anti non-heteronormative family advocate.
Those sure are big words, yes sir!
I guess you must be right!
believes same-sex "marriage" activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan.
One might like to remind the paranoid that transgender activists and
gay activists aren't the same people.
Right. What's the diff, with respect to their attitudes to women's
pussies and their own assholes?
New York City is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter the sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery.
Surgery is not available to everyone. It's costly. And there is no
reason why this should be the litmut test.
That's right! Why should a man identify himself as a man? Why should
a woman identify herself as a woman? As long as we are "progressing",
why stop there? People should be able to put whatever they want in
their job applications, for example, everybody applying for a computer
programming position can state that they have a doctorate from CalTech,
after all why should the fact that they haven't achieved the doctorate
degree be the litmus test?
Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth,
Because there are many Americans against Truth... *rolls eyes*
There always are.
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The transgender
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay marriage,"
he suggests.
This is a complete non-sequitur. Transgenders are not (necessarily)
homosexuals, and vice-versa. You're not even speaking of the same
people. A lesbian male-to-female transgendered person can already marry
her female lover right now, because the law claims she's male.
Is that how one can get lesbians into the sack these days??!!
In a bar:
Me: Hey babe, how is it going?
Lesbian: Please don't bother me, I'm a lesbian.
Me: Me too! You see, I'm a lesbian female trapped in a male
heterosexual body.
..
..
..
In the sack:
Lesbian: That sure is a big *****!
This is all just a bunch of ***** from idiots who have no idea what
they're talking about. Biological sex isn't gender isn't sexual
orientation.
"What they're doing is they're saying gender is what you want
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God."
Transgenderism has a biological basis. The idea that the biological sex
is the only determinant of gender is fucking backward. Genetics shows
this is not necessarily the case. You can be XY and have a vagina. So
there.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DarkAngel" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
29 Nov 2006 10:11:41 AM |
|
|
Tuco Ramirez wrote:
DarkAngel wrote:
J Young wrote:
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or other
physical alterations.
Unmentionned is the fact that the person must have been diagnosed as
trangendered by a licensed psychologist/psychotherapist.
The opinion of a witch doctor or a rain-maker is worth as much of
either of the "authorithies" you mention.
Whatever. Only an idiot would think that complex neurological behavior
like gender has to be 100% related to a single chromosome.
One might like to remind the paranoid that transgender activists and
gay activists aren't the same people.
Right. What's the diff, with respect to their attitudes to women's
pussies and their own assholes?
Gay men identify as men. Male to female (MTF) transgenders identify as
women.
Gay men don't want to get surgery and get their penis replaced with a
vagina. They don't try to pass as women. They don't dress as women,
they don't act like women. MTF transgenders do.
As for attitudes toward women's pussies, MTF trans want one, and gay
men want to stay away from them. Regarding anal, some gay men enjoy it
and some MTF trans also do, just like some women also like it.
That's right! Why should a man identify himself as a man? Why should
a woman identify herself as a woman?
Why should a woman who happens to be XY identify as a man?
This is a complete non-sequitur. Transgenders are not (necessarily)
homosexuals, and vice-versa. You're not even speaking of the same
people. A lesbian male-to-female transgendered person can already marry
her female lover right now, because the law claims she's male.
Is that how one can get lesbians into the sack these days??!!
In a bar:
Me: Hey babe, how is it going?
Lesbian: Please don't bother me, I'm a lesbian.
Me: Me too! You see, I'm a lesbian female trapped in a male
heterosexual body.
Lesbian: Yeah, cause a lot of MTF trans go around in public without
dressing up and passing as female. Jerk.
---
No Gods. No Masters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tuco Ramirez" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
29 Nov 2006 01:39:34 PM |
|
|
DarkAngel wrote:
Tuco Ramirez wrote:
DarkAngel wrote:
J Young wrote:
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or other
physical alterations.
Unmentionned is the fact that the person must have been diagnosed as
trangendered by a licensed psychologist/psychotherapist.
The opinion of a witch doctor or a rain-maker is worth as much of
either of the "authorithies" you mention.
Whatever. Only an idiot would think that complex neurological behavior
like gender has to be 100% related to a single chromosome.
One might like to remind the paranoid that transgender activists and
gay activists aren't the same people.
Right. What's the diff, with respect to their attitudes to women's
pussies and their own assholes?
Gay men identify as men. Male to female (MTF) transgenders identify as
women.
Gay men don't want to get surgery and get their penis replaced with a
vagina. They don't try to pass as women. They don't dress as women,
they don't act like women. MTF transgenders do.
As for attitudes toward women's pussies, MTF trans want one, and gay
men want to stay away from them. Regarding anal, some gay men enjoy it
and some MTF trans also do, just like some women also like it.
That's right! Why should a man identify himself as a man? Why should
a woman identify herself as a woman?
Why should a woman who happens to be XY identify as a man?
This is a complete non-sequitur. Transgenders are not (necessarily)
homosexuals, and vice-versa. You're not even speaking of the same
people. A lesbian male-to-female transgendered person can already marry
her female lover right now, because the law claims she's male.
Is that how one can get lesbians into the sack these days??!!
In a bar:
Me: Hey babe, how is it going?
Lesbian: Please don't bother me, I'm a lesbian.
Me: Me too! You see, I'm a lesbian female trapped in a male
heterosexual body.
Lesbian: Yeah, cause a lot of MTF trans go around in public without
dressing up and passing as female. Jerk.
You seem very close-minded about what a MTF trans is supposed to be.
You need to get rid of your hang-ups and open your mind a bit!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
15 Nov 2006 11:44:47 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or other
physical alterations. One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "marriage"
activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan. New York City is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter the sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth,
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The transgender
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay marriage,"
he suggests. "What they're doing is they're saying gender is what you want
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God." It is
preposterous, LaBarbera contends, for a person to simply decide what his or
her gender is when "for the vast, vast majority of people, they have biology
to tell them." The Americans for Truth spokesman says he believes this
campaign to redefine gender "is the most radical movement, I think, in the
whole agenda." The New York City Board of Health is expected to vote on the
proposal in December, and it is expected to pass.
What is it that you don't GET about the fact that America is NOT a
christian nation and has no obligation to adhere to christian doctrine?
The bible says that homosexuality is wrong. SO FUCKING WHAT? It also
says to kill disobedient children and people who work sunday. I don't
see you fighting to get THOSE parts of the bible enforced. Why are you
so obsessed with other people's sex lives? How will it POSSIBLY affect
ANY heterosexual marriage if two people who love each other and want to
commit thier lives to each other who happen to be the same gender get
thier relationship officiated by the state? HOW DOES IT AFFECT YOU OR
ANYONE ELSE IN ANY WAY? Explain to us all exactly what they are doing
wrong! All you can do is scream vague accusations of immorality without
explaining why it is immoral. Or spew ridiculous predictions about gay
marriage leading to people marrying thier dogs. Find me a dog capable
of clearly and unmistakably expressing a desire to marry someone and
you might have an argument. I have never heard anyone give a reason to
consider homosexuality to be immoral. Here is your chance. We are all
listening. Explain, without resorting to the bible, why homosexuality
is immoral. There is no connection between homosexuality and
pedophelia. Some pedophiles are gay, some are straight. It is the
pedophilia that is wrong, not homosexuality. If they were heterosexual,
they would be molesting children of the opposite sex.
One of the foundations that America was built on was the right of every
person to follow whatever creed they wish, so long as they do not step
on anyone else's rights. You want to be a christian? Fine. We don't
care. You do NOT have the right to force your beliefs on anyone else or
demand that the rest of the country be governed by YOUR religion's
dogma.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 12:40:40 AM |
|
|
Conspiracy of Doves a =E9crit :
J Young wrote:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new propo=
sal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without regard=
to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or ot=
her
physical alterations. One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "marria=
ge"
activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan. New York City is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter the sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for T=
ruth,
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The transgen=
der
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay marriag=
e,"
he suggests. "What they're doing is they're saying gender is what you w=
ant
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God." It is
preposterous, LaBarbera contends, for a person to simply decide what hi=
s or
her gender is when "for the vast, vast majority of people, they have bi=
ology
to tell them." The Americans for Truth spokesman says he believes this
campaign to redefine gender "is the most radical movement, I think, in =
the
whole agenda." The New York City Board of Health is expected to vote on=
the
proposal in December, and it is expected to pass.
What is it that you don't GET about the fact that America is NOT a
christian nation and has no obligation to adhere to christian doctrine?
The bible says that homosexuality is wrong. SO FUCKING WHAT?
Don't ask J Young anything... 1- He won't answer, 2- He's incapable of
one original idea (all he does is "copy and paste" from conservative
"sources", 3- He's a self-loathing closet gay with fascist tendencies.
It also
says to kill disobedient children and people who work sunday. I don't
see you fighting to get THOSE parts of the bible enforced. Why are you
so obsessed with other people's sex lives? How will it POSSIBLY affect
ANY heterosexual marriage if two people who love each other and want to
commit thier lives to each other who happen to be the same gender get
thier relationship officiated by the state? HOW DOES IT AFFECT YOU OR
ANYONE ELSE IN ANY WAY? Explain to us all exactly what they are doing
wrong! All you can do is scream vague accusations of immorality without
explaining why it is immoral. Or spew ridiculous predictions about gay
marriage leading to people marrying thier dogs. Find me a dog capable
of clearly and unmistakably expressing a desire to marry someone and
you might have an argument. I have never heard anyone give a reason to
consider homosexuality to be immoral. Here is your chance. We are all
listening. Explain, without resorting to the bible, why homosexuality
is immoral. There is no connection between homosexuality and
pedophelia. Some pedophiles are gay, some are straight. It is the
pedophilia that is wrong, not homosexuality. If they were heterosexual,
they would be molesting children of the opposite sex.
One of the foundations that America was built on was the right of every
person to follow whatever creed they wish, so long as they do not step
on anyone else's rights. You want to be a christian? Fine. We don't
care. You do NOT have the right to force your beliefs on anyone else or
demand that the rest of the country be governed by YOUR religion's
dogma.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 09:31:39 AM |
|
|
Parsifal wrote:
Conspiracy of Doves a =E9crit :
J Young wrote:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new pro=
posal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without rega=
rd to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or =
other
physical alterations. One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "marr=
iage"
activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan. New York City=
is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter the sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for=
Truth,
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The transg=
ender
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay marri=
age,"
he suggests. "What they're doing is they're saying gender is what you=
want
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God." It =
is
preposterous, LaBarbera contends, for a person to simply decide what =
his or
her gender is when "for the vast, vast majority of people, they have =
biology
to tell them." The Americans for Truth spokesman says he believes this
campaign to redefine gender "is the most radical movement, I think, i=
n the
whole agenda." The New York City Board of Health is expected to vote =
on the
proposal in December, and it is expected to pass.
What is it that you don't GET about the fact that America is NOT a
christian nation and has no obligation to adhere to christian doctrine?
The bible says that homosexuality is wrong. SO FUCKING WHAT?
Don't ask J Young anything... 1- He won't answer, 2- He's incapable of
one original idea (all he does is "copy and paste" from conservative
"sources", 3- He's a self-loathing closet gay with fascist tendencies.
*Sigh* I know. I just feel ashamed that I'm a member of the same
species as that mindless drone and I just feel so compelled to do
something about it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 10:30:23 AM |
|
|
expressed precisely :
Parsifal wrote:
Conspiracy of Doves a écrit :
J Young wrote:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical or other
physical alterations. One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "marriage"
activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan. New York City is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter the sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for
Truth, says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The
transgender agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called
gay marriage," he suggests. "What they're doing is they're saying gender
is what you want it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be
by God." It is preposterous, LaBarbera contends, for a person to simply
decide what his or her gender is when "for the vast, vast majority of
people, they have biology to tell them." The Americans for Truth spokesman
says he believes this campaign to redefine gender "is the most radical
movement, I think, in the whole agenda." The New York City Board of Health
is expected to vote on the proposal in December, and it is expected to
pass.
What is it that you don't GET about the fact that America is NOT a
christian nation and has no obligation to adhere to christian doctrine?
The bible says that homosexuality is wrong. SO FUCKING WHAT?
Don't ask J Young anything... 1- He won't answer, 2- He's incapable of
one original idea (all he does is "copy and paste" from conservative
"sources", 3- He's a self-loathing closet gay with fascist tendencies.
*Sigh* I know. I just feel ashamed that I'm a member of the same
species as that mindless drone and I just feel so compelled to do
something about it.
You have no reason to be ashamed; you are not of the same species. J.
Young left the human species long ago.... he belongs to the species
christianus idiotus, a species headed for extinction due to its own
behaviors. >:|
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "bobandcarole" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 12:52:20 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Parsifal wrote:
Conspiracy of Doves a =E9crit :
J Young wrote:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new p=
roposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without re=
gard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical o=
r other
physical alterations. One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "ma=
rriage"
activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan. New York Ci=
ty is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter the =
sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans f=
or Truth,
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The tran=
sgender
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay mar=
riage,"
he suggests. "What they're doing is they're saying gender is what y=
ou want
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God." I=
t is
preposterous, LaBarbera contends, for a person to simply decide wha=
t his or
her gender is when "for the vast, vast majority of people, they hav=
e biology
to tell them." The Americans for Truth spokesman says he believes t=
his
campaign to redefine gender "is the most radical movement, I think,=
in the
whole agenda." The New York City Board of Health is expected to vot=
e on the
proposal in December, and it is expected to pass.
What is it that you don't GET about the fact that America is NOT a
christian nation and has no obligation to adhere to christian doctrin=
e?
The bible says that homosexuality is wrong. SO FUCKING WHAT?
Don't ask J Young anything... 1- He won't answer, 2- He's incapable of
one original idea (all he does is "copy and paste" from conservative
"sources", 3- He's a self-loathing closet gay with fascist tendencies.
*Sigh* I know. I just feel ashamed that I'm a member of the same
species as that mindless drone and I just feel so compelled to do
something about it.
Do you actually believe the sick homo deviants have the right to
marry????
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
19 Nov 2006 11:04:49 PM |
|
|
bobandcarole wrote:
mark_dp73@yahoo.com wrote:
Parsifal wrote:
Conspiracy of Doves a =E9crit :
J Young wrote:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new=
proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without =
regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical=
or other
physical alterations. One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "=
marriage"
activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan. New York =
City is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter th=
e sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans=
for Truth,
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The tr=
ansgender
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay m=
arriage,"
he suggests. "What they're doing is they're saying gender is what=
you want
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God."=
It is
preposterous, LaBarbera contends, for a person to simply decide w=
hat his or
her gender is when "for the vast, vast majority of people, they h=
ave biology
to tell them." The Americans for Truth spokesman says he believes=
this
campaign to redefine gender "is the most radical movement, I thin=
k, in the
whole agenda." The New York City Board of Health is expected to v=
ote on the
proposal in December, and it is expected to pass.
What is it that you don't GET about the fact that America is NOT a
christian nation and has no obligation to adhere to christian doctr=
ine?
The bible says that homosexuality is wrong. SO FUCKING WHAT?
Don't ask J Young anything... 1- He won't answer, 2- He's incapable of
one original idea (all he does is "copy and paste" from conservative
"sources", 3- He's a self-loathing closet gay with fascist tendencies.
*Sigh* I know. I just feel ashamed that I'm a member of the same
species as that mindless drone and I just feel so compelled to do
something about it.
Do you actually believe the sick homo deviants have the right to
marry????
Pleas explain the following:
1) Why are they sick?
2) What are they deviating from?
3) Why is it wrong to deviate from whatever it is that they are
deviating from?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 01:11:34 PM |
|
|
bobandcarole wrote:
mark_dp73@yahoo.com wrote:
Parsifal wrote:
Conspiracy of Doves a =E9crit :
J Young wrote:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/11/152006h.asp
...The New York City Board of Health is considering a radical new=
proposal
that would allow people to change their gender on paper, without =
regard to
their God-given anatomy and without the necessity of any surgical=
or other
physical alterations. One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "=
marriage"
activists have an ulterior motive in pushing this plan. New York =
City is
moving forward with the proposal, which would let people alter th=
e sex
listed on their birth certificate, even if they have not had
sex-reassignment surgery. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans=
for Truth,
says this new approach to sex-redefinition has a purpose. "The tr=
ansgender
agenda may be the way that the homosexuals secure so-called gay m=
arriage,"
he suggests. "What they're doing is they're saying gender is what=
you want
it to be instead of what it's biologically created to be by God."=
It is
preposterous, LaBarbera contends, for a person to simply decide w=
hat his or
her gender is when "for the vast, vast majority of people, they h=
ave biology
to tell them." The Americans for Truth spokesman says he believes=
this
campaign to redefine gender "is the most radical movement, I thin=
k, in the
whole agenda." The New York City Board of Health is expected to v=
ote on the
proposal in December, and it is expected to pass.
What is it that you don't GET about the fact that America is NOT a
christian nation and has no obligation to adhere to christian doctr=
ine?
The bible says that homosexuality is wrong. SO FUCKING WHAT?
Don't ask J Young anything... 1- He won't answer, 2- He's incapable of
one original idea (all he does is "copy and paste" from conservative
"sources", 3- He's a self-loathing closet gay with fascist tendencies.
*Sigh* I know. I just feel ashamed that I'm a member of the same
species as that mindless drone and I just feel so compelled to do
something about it.
Do you actually believe the sick homo deviants have the right to
marry????
Well, sick heterosexual deviants like you have the right to get
married.
Perhaps you can explain why you are concentrating your arguments around
the minute subgroup of homosexuals that you term as "sick homosexual
deviant" (while not explaining what you mean by "sick" and "deviant" in
this context), rather than addressing the homosexual community as a
whole, which is comprised almost entirely of normal, healthy
homosexuals.
Normal homosexuals, which describes the overwhelming majority of
homosexuals, should have the right to get married. It is nothing but
blatant discrimination that prevents them from doing so. And
thankfully, the country is wising up to the fact. I have yet to here
are single reason why homosexuals should not have the right to get
married that is not based in religion or homophobia. And religion has
no place in the law and nobody should be allowed to force others to
follow their religions beliefs. And homophobia is irrational to start
with and thus can safely be discounted.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DarkAngel" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 10:04:34 AM |
|
|
Conspiracy of Doves wrote:
What is it that you don't GET about the fact that America is NOT a
christian nation and has no obligation to adhere to christian doctrine?
The bible says that homosexuality is wrong. SO FUCKING WHAT?
True. Especially since the subject of the article has ***** all to do
with homosexuality.
---
No Gods. No Masters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: J Young's Latest Ploy to Get Noticed |
16 Nov 2006 05:52:53 PM |
|
|
NewsFlash:
In a desperate attempt for intimate attention from the homosexual
community that he so wishes would embrace him, J. Young once again
posted a Usenet message that barely does credit to what a huge *****
he is.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 08:39:57 AM |
|
|
Obsessed closet case "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:icSdnfA9O-ljbsbYnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@giganews.com...
One pro-family advocate believes same-sex "marriage" activists have an
ulterior motive in pushing this plan.
And, gawd knows, those "pro-family" activists certainly have no "agenda",
hmmm?
"I am an egalitarian. I am pro-woman, pro-gay, pro-child, anti-Bush."
From: (J Young), lying. Again.
Message-ID: <9c2d0f9a.0409132028.141e055a@posting.google.com>
LC~ "J Young's" ulterior motive is showcasing his obsessive stupidity.
Daily.
"Hey look, it's Lappcatt the gay anti-abortionist this time disguising
himself as "Jon Young". Yours must be a very lonely existence with no
friends and shunned wherever you post. Why not just end your misery and
kill yourself?"
From: "Professor" <vze3v...@verizon.net>
Message-ID: 1w0kc.33692$eK3.9945@nwrdny01.gnilink.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 10:32:42 AM |
|
|
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 05:09:05 PM |
|
|
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never
stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and
neither do we"
- George W. Bush - Aug 5, 2004
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
.
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 05:48:11 PM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
I think that the concern is that, say, two men want to get married but
can't, so one of them decides to change his birth certificate to say
he's female, then they can get married...
On paper it would be a male marrying a female. Biologically, and in
reality, it would be two males marrying each other (one having
documentation that he is female when in reality he is male).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 07:20:07 PM |
|
|
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to establish legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
"ScottyFLL" <zmsscorpio@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1163720891.866787.261570@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Al Klein wrote:
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
I think that the concern is that, say, two men want to get married but
can't, so one of them decides to change his birth certificate to say
he's female, then they can get married...
On paper it would be a male marrying a female. Biologically, and in
reality, it would be two males marrying each other (one having
documentation that he is female when in reality he is male).
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 07:37:55 PM |
|
|
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6787h.360$625.283@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to establish legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
And, how about showng us every species in the animal kingdom that has
homosexual marriage in it.
"ScottyFLL" <zmsscorpio@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1163720891.866787.261570@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Al Klein wrote:
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
I think that the concern is that, say, two men want to get married but
can't, so one of them decides to change his birth certificate to say
he's female, then they can get married...
On paper it would be a male marrying a female. Biologically, and in
reality, it would be two males marrying each other (one having
documentation that he is female when in reality he is male).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
16 Nov 2006 10:46:51 PM |
|
|
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6787h.360$625.283@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to establish legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
And, how about showng us every species in the animal kingdom that has
homosexual marriage in it.
There is exactly one such species. Human beings. No other species
has marriage at all, since marriage is a function of government and
society and based in laws and traditions. Therefore no other species
can have homosexual marriages.
By the way, making such a demand means that you will not accept any
results that people give in any case, because you will claim that the
list is not complete. What's more, you are well known for NOT
supporting your own premises and assertions, especially when you are
asked to and/or shown that your premise is not only false by in
opposition to the actual facts. Therefore, you have no right to demand
that others support their statements.
Mark Sebree
"ScottyFLL" <zmsscorpio@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1163720891.866787.261570@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Al Klein wrote:
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
I think that the concern is that, say, two men want to get married but
can't, so one of them decides to change his birth certificate to say
he's female, then they can get married...
On paper it would be a male marrying a female. Biologically, and in
reality, it would be two males marrying each other (one having
documentation that he is female when in reality he is male).
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 11:13:20 AM |
|
|
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163738811.908819.321020@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6787h.360$625.283@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to establish
legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
And, how about showng us every species in the animal kingdom that has
homosexual marriage in it.
There is exactly one such species. Human beings. No other species
has marriage at all, since marriage is a function of government and
society and based in laws and traditions. Therefore no other species
can have homosexual marriages.
You are grasping for a straw that says that since animals do it, when you go
on to say that animals don't marry, isn't adding up.
If you want to be like animals, then don't marry.
By the way, making such a demand means that you will not accept any
results that people give in any case, because you will claim that the
list is not complete. What's more, you are well known for NOT
supporting your own premises and assertions, especially when you are
asked to and/or shown that your premise is not only false by in
opposition to the actual facts. Therefore, you have no right to demand
that others support their statements.
Mark Sebree
"ScottyFLL" <zmsscorpio@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1163720891.866787.261570@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Al Klein wrote:
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
I think that the concern is that, say, two men want to get married but
can't, so one of them decides to change his birth certificate to say
he's female, then they can get married...
On paper it would be a male marrying a female. Biologically, and in
reality, it would be two males marrying each other (one having
documentation that he is female when in reality he is male).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 12:45:29 PM |
|
|
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163738811.908819.321020@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6787h.360$625.283@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to establish
legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
And, how about showng us every species in the animal kingdom that has
homosexual marriage in it.
There is exactly one such species. Human beings. No other species
has marriage at all, since marriage is a function of government and
society and based in laws and traditions. Therefore no other species
can have homosexual marriages.
You are grasping for a straw that says that since animals do it, when you go
on to say that animals don't marry, isn't adding up.
Nope. I answered your question EXACTLY as it was written, as well as
showing how sloppy your question was. Marriage is a legal construct,
which requires laws, which animals do not have.
If you want to be like animals, then don't marry.
Human being ARE animals. And whether or not I get married is none of
your concern.
By the way, making such a demand means that you will not accept any
results that people give in any case, because you will claim that the
list is not complete. What's more, you are well known for NOT
supporting your own premises and assertions, especially when you are
asked to and/or shown that your premise is not only false by in
opposition to the actual facts. Therefore, you have no right to demand
that others support their statements.
Mark Sebree
"ScottyFLL" <zmsscorpio@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1163720891.866787.261570@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Al Klein wrote:
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
I think that the concern is that, say, two men want to get married but
can't, so one of them decides to change his birth certificate to say
he's female, then they can get married...
On paper it would be a male marrying a female. Biologically, and in
reality, it would be two males marrying each other (one having
documentation that he is female when in reality he is male).
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 02:01:07 PM |
|
|
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163789129.456376.85960@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163738811.908819.321020@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6787h.360$625.283@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of
life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to establish
legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
And, how about showng us every species in the animal kingdom that has
homosexual marriage in it.
There is exactly one such species. Human beings. No other species
has marriage at all, since marriage is a function of government and
society and based in laws and traditions. Therefore no other species
can have homosexual marriages.
You are grasping for a straw that says that since animals do it, when you
go
on to say that animals don't marry, isn't adding up.
Nope. I answered your question EXACTLY as it was written, as well as
showing how sloppy your question was. Marriage is a legal construct,
which requires laws, which animals do not have.
If you want to be like animals, then don't marry.
Human being ARE animals.
Nah. You are an animal by your statement, and animals do not have legal
rights like humans do.
And whether or not I get married is none of
your concern.
I am not worried about whether or not you get married.
By the way, making such a demand means that you will not accept any
results that people give in any case, because you will claim that the
list is not complete. What's more, you are well known for NOT
supporting your own premises and assertions, especially when you are
asked to and/or shown that your premise is not only false by in
opposition to the actual facts. Therefore, you have no right to demand
that others support their statements.
Mark Sebree
"ScottyFLL" <zmsscorpio@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1163720891.866787.261570@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Al Klein wrote:
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female
transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
I think that the concern is that, say, two men want to get married
but
can't, so one of them decides to change his birth certificate to
say
he's female, then they can get married...
On paper it would be a male marrying a female. Biologically, and
in
reality, it would be two males marrying each other (one having
documentation that he is female when in reality he is male).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 05:55:07 PM |
|
|
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163789129.456376.85960@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163738811.908819.321020@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6787h.360$625.283@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of
life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to establish
legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
And, how about showng us every species in the animal kingdom that has
homosexual marriage in it.
There is exactly one such species. Human beings. No other species
has marriage at all, since marriage is a function of government and
society and based in laws and traditions. Therefore no other species
can have homosexual marriages.
You are grasping for a straw that says that since animals do it, when you
go on to say that animals don't marry, isn't adding up.
Nope. I answered your question EXACTLY as it was written, as well as
showing how sloppy your question was. Marriage is a legal construct,
which requires laws, which animals do not have.
If you want to be like animals, then don't marry.
Human being ARE animals.
Nah. You are an animal by your statement,
As are you and every other human being. Your denial does not change
the facts.
Unless, of course, you are claiming to be a rock or a vegetable.
Neither of which I would discount out of hand.
and animals do not have legal
rights like humans do.
Which means that, according to you, you do not have any legal rights
either.
Despite your delusions and willful ignorance and blindness, human
beings are animals. Your denying that fact does not change the fact.
If you claim that human beings are not animals, you will need to
support your assertion and disprove all the reputable scientists wrong.
Mark Sebree
And whether or not I get married is none of
your concern.
I am not worried about whether or not you get married.
By the way, making such a demand means that you will not accept any
results that people give in any case, because you will claim that the
list is not complete. What's more, you are well known for NOT
supporting your own premises and assertions, especially when you are
asked to and/or shown that your premise is not only false by in
opposition to the actual facts. Therefore, you have no right to demand
that others support their statements.
Mark Sebree
"ScottyFLL" <zmsscorpio@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1163720891.866787.261570@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Al Klein wrote:
On 16 Nov 2006 08:32:42 -0800, "ScottyFLL" <ScottyFLL@gmail.com>
wrote:
Wonderful stuff! Wish I'd thought of it! So basically, same-sex
marriage will now be legal in New York!
Exactly the opposite. If you're, say, a male-to-female
transgender,
you can already marry a woman. If you now register as female, you
CAN'T marry a woman. (A male-to-female transgender is a woman,
whether she's straight or gay.)
--
I think that the concern is that, say, two men want to get married
but
can't, so one of them decides to change his birth certificate to
say
he's female, then they can get married...
On paper it would be a male marrying a female. Biologically, and
in
reality, it would be two males marrying each other (one having
documentation that he is female when in reality he is male).
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 06:23:53 PM |
|
|
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163807707.588544.140600@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163789129.456376.85960@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163738811.908819.321020@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6787h.360$625.283@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of
life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to
establish
legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
And, how about showng us every species in the animal kingdom that
has
homosexual marriage in it.
There is exactly one such species. Human beings. No other species
has marriage at all, since marriage is a function of government and
society and based in laws and traditions. Therefore no other
species
can have homosexual marriages.
You are grasping for a straw that says that since animals do it, when
you
go on to say that animals don't marry, isn't adding up.
Nope. I answered your question EXACTLY as it was written, as well as
showing how sloppy your question was. Marriage is a legal construct,
which requires laws, which animals do not have.
If you want to be like animals, then don't marry.
Human being ARE animals.
Nah. You are an animal by your statement,
As are you and every other human being.
Not so, idiot.
I am not classified by your words. You are subject to your own words, and
only you.
Your denial does not change
the facts.
You are an animal, by your own words.
I am above you in the social hierarchy, because I am not an animal.
Unless, of course, you are claiming to be a rock or a vegetable.
Neither of which I would discount out of hand.
I am a man.
You are an animal, by your own admission.
and animals do not have legal
rights like humans do.
Which means that, according to you, you do not have any legal rights
either.
No, idiot wimp animal circus freak.
You are an animal because you said you are an animal.
I am NOT judged by your words.
Your words are lies to me too often for me to be labelled by them.
Despite your delusions and willful ignorance and blindness, human
beings are animals.
You are an animal by your own words.
I am NOT an animal, because I do not call myself an animal.
What animal are you?
Your denying that fact does not change the fact.
If you claim that human beings are not animals, you will need to
support your assertion and disprove all the reputable scientists wrong.
You say human beings are animals.
I don't say that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 07:08:27 PM |
|
|
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163807707.588544.140600@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163789129.456376.85960@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Mark Sebree" <sebree@infionline.net> wrote in message
news:1163738811.908819.321020@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
John D.Wentzky wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:6787h.360$625.283@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
It is time to face reality. Homosexuals are a biological fact of
life
throughout the animal world.
In addition to marriage between men and women we need to
establish
legal
binding partnerships between people of the same gender.
And, how about showng us every species in the animal kingdom that
has
homosexual marriage in it.
There is exactly one such species. Human beings. No other species
has marriage at all, since marriage is a function of government and
society and based in laws and traditions. Therefore no other
species
can have homosexual marriages.
You are grasping for a straw that says that since animals do it, when
you
go on to say that animals don't marry, isn't adding up.
Nope. I answered your question EXACTLY as it was written, as well as
showing how sloppy your question was. Marriage is a legal construct,
which requires laws, which animals do not have.
If you want to be like animals, then don't marry.
Human being ARE animals.
Nah. You are an animal by your statement,
As are you and every other human being.
Not so, idiot.
Actually, idiot, it is so.
I am not classified by your words.
You are classified by your biology, however. By definition, all human
beings are animals.
You are subject to your own words, and
only you.
Nope. In this case, you are subject to them as well, since my
statement is a statement of well established fact.
Your denial does not change
the facts.
You are an animal, by your own words.
As are you.
I am above you in the social hierarchy, because I am not an animal.
You are far below me in the social hierarchy because of your lack of
intelligence, hatefulness, and refusal to work. And you are an animal,
unless you are a rock or a vegetable. Those are the only three
choices.
Unless, of course, you are claiming to be a rock or a vegetable.
Neither of which I would discount out of hand.
I am a man.
That makes you an animal.
You are an animal, by your own admission.
Because, unlike you, I deal in facts. I am willing to admit to facts,
even when they are unpleasant to some ignorant and willfully blind
people like you.
and animals do not have legal
rights like humans do.
Which means that, according to you, you do not have any legal rights
either.
No, idiot wimp animal circus freak.
That would be you, not me. Unlike you, I am none of those things,
including "animal" as you seem to mean it here. And you are the one
that said that you have no legal rights since you are an animal, not
me. All human beings are animals, whether you are willing to admit it
or not.
You are an animal because you said you are an animal.
As is every other human being. I am just telling you what the facts
are. Whether or not you like them or can accept them does not change
them.
I am NOT judged by your words.
You ARE judged by YOUR words, however, as well as your attitude and how
you treat others. That is why you have such a dismal reputation.
And as are as how you are judged biologically and physically, that
depends on your species. There are only three major choices on the
macroscopic scale: animal, plant, or mineral. All human beings are
animals by definition. If you are claiming to not be a human being, as
well as not being an animal, then you need to state what you
classification is, as well as why you think you should have the rights
that human beings reserve for human beings.
Your words are lies to me too often for me to be labelled by them.
My words are the truth to everyone else, however. Your willful
blindness and hatefulness does not eliminate the facts that I continue
to tell you. You calling the truth "lies" because you do not like the
truth does not stop it from being the truth. And the fact that you
cannot support what you claim whereas I can shows that I am telling the
truth that you do not want to recognize. Such as the well established
truth that you are just as much of an animal as I am.
Despite your delusions and willful ignorance and blindness, human
beings are animals.
You are an animal by your own words.
As is every other human being in this planet.
I am NOT an animal,
Then are you are rock or a plant? The only three choices are animal,
plant, or mineral after all.
because I do not call myself an animal.
That does not change the fact that you are an animal. Whether or not
you admit to it does not change the facts.
What animal are you?
Homo sapiens. A human being.
The complete taxonomy is:
KINGDOM - ANIMALIA
PHYLUM - CHORDATA
SUBPHYLUM - VERTEBRATA
CLASS - MAMMALIA
SUBCLASS - EUTHERIA
ORDER - PRIMATA
SUBORDER - ARTHROPOIDEA
FAMILY - HOMINIDAE
GENUS - HOMO
SPECIES - SAPIENS
And here is an explanation of the breakdown of the taxonomy, i.e. the
why were are classified as we are:
http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/kids/science/Biology%20Cells/Studies/Human%20Taxonomy.htm
Your denying that fact does not change the fact.
If you claim that human beings are not animals, you will need to
support your assertion and disprove all the reputable scientists wrong.
You say human beings are animals.
Because it is the truth. A fact that is well established in science.
I don't say that.
However, you spent the entire post denying the facts and the truth.
You are claiming that you are better than me because of your willful
blindness and ignorance, which is not a reason to claim you are better
than anyone.
I have not seen any support for your premise. You have yet to even
attempt to show that human beings are not members of the taxological
kingdom Animalia. You have put forth the premise, so you need to
support it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D.Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Homos latest ploy to get married |
17 Nov 2006 07:59:28 PM |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
